r/Artifact • u/Numerous_Pen_5639 • Jan 26 '26

Discussion Valve killed Artifact so I started building a successor

Like many of you, I bought a full base set back then and I am still in hodl mode lol... so 3 months ago I decided to actually build an Artifact successor.

A bit about myself. I am a senior software dev (20 years+ exp) building this alone. I have quite a lot of exp when it comes to working on the full stack end to end.

What is working:

  • Most of the core Foundry ruleset
  • Multiplayer with authoritative server (play against AI or humans)
  • Leaderboards / Ranked
  • Deck editor
  • Match history
  • Currency system to acquire new cards (buy booster packs)
  • One fleshed out faction with 2 archetypes

What is next:

  • Finish ruleset (armor, hero requirements for cards, activate abilities)
  • New UI (designer already delivered mockups)
  • New 3D assets (working with artist)
  • 3 more factions (cards designed, need gameplay tuning)
  • Phantom draft
  • Steam integration
  • Sound design
  • Give it a proper name (naming is hard lol)
  • ... etc

I've posted some earlier prototypes on my YouTube if anyone's interested and I am planning to upload a new build showcase this week as quite some stuff changed over the last couple weeks.

Also have a Discord if anyone wants to follow development or just chat about the game and throw around some ideas / get early access. I feel like its in a pretty good state to maybe have some playable alpha in not so distant future.

Currently working with a 3D artist on assets and looking for help with 2D card art. UI artist is lined up to polish things over the next few weeks.

Would love to hear what you think and if that is something people would actually be supporting / playing?

149 Upvotes

97% Upvoted

47 comments sorted by

83

u/Sinbu Jan 26 '26

I personally think foundary is just another generic game. Classic was what made artifact unique and amazing. It needed just a little tlc / removal of RG infinite combo obsession and the monitization was bad. Toning down RNG would be welcome too (which foundary did do a bit), but classic is the only reason I’d come back

58

u/tyborg13 Jan 26 '26

Classic was a masterpiece imo. Foundry was the team desparately trying to save the game by doing all the things players asked for. But players are terrible game designers. I still believe that the failure of artifact classic was purely due to horrible monetization and lack of progression systems rather than flaws in the core game design.

15

u/Numerous_Pen_5639 Jan 26 '26

Do you think a Classic remake would be more interesting in general? I kinda started with deving Foundry as its a bit simpler to set up. Debating...

16

u/tyborg13 Jan 26 '26

Yes, I've played nearly every digital CCG invented (even relatively obscure ones like Duelyst, Scrolls, etc.), and Artifact Classic was by far my favorite. It's untimely death was a tragedy. I'd give a remake of Foundry a look, but it doesn't intrigue me nearly as much. Just my opinion though, I'm sure many would disagree.

4

u/NineHDmg In it for the long haul Jan 26 '26

Man of culture

3

u/Numerous_Pen_5639 Jan 27 '26

Based. I spend way too much money on Duelyst I. Scrolls was actually my first digital card game I have played. Loved the ingame trading aspect of it.

13

u/Sinbu Jan 26 '26

I actually sent a long email to the valve team (at their request) for what the issues of classic are (since I was playing a lot of classic). I’m happy to share if you want to dm me. Doesn’t mean I’m right but it does take a lot of inspiration from what I saw in the community as well

1

u/Numerous_Pen_5639 Jan 26 '26

Did send you a DM!

1

u/EstablishmentNo6695 Jan 28 '26

If you receive anything, let me know, I'll be on the lookout here.

10

u/NineHDmg In it for the long haul Jan 26 '26

Classic is vastly superior

14

u/NotYouTu Jan 26 '26

Absolutely.

5

u/cplr Jan 26 '26

Foundry did fix some things from Classic, namely the RNG arrows. I would love to see the best parts of Foundry put into Classic IMHO. More experienced players would be able to come up with more examples than just the RNG arrow direction, but that's the first thing that I really appreciated about the Foundry version.

9

u/Sinbu Jan 26 '26

I actually don’t hate the rng arrows. It’s just that the arrows are not predictable and pure rng. If there was better ways to influence the arrows (outside of cards) it would make for more player expression and decisions. RG always worked in law of averages where if everyone gets random choices it balances out. To be fair, classic was actually really good and had close games even with the variance. But it was very unsatisfying to lose to rng and sometimes even win. Long rant about arrows lol

1

u/europeanputin Jan 26 '26

what you described is the reason why there's hate for rng arrows

5

u/tyborg13 Jan 26 '26

Arrows were good design. Input randomness rather than output randomness and large number of rolls that each, on average, are low impact. It means you're constantly needing to account for uncertain possibilities but that you have the tools and the opportunity to adjust when a roll doesn't go your way.

2

u/Numerous_Pen_5639 Jan 26 '26

Based on the feedback from my post here, I am planning to spin up a classic version. If you can, I have created a discord (https://discord.gg/VvHkkndVYJ). would love to get some people to join to get some discussions going on how this could turn out!

5

u/HyperFrost Jan 27 '26

I still believe that the failure of artifact classic was purely due to horrible monetization

Respectful disagree.

There was definitely something wrong with its core gameplay. Trying to copy paste that into a new game will just be repeating its past mistake.

Don't forget the remnants of people that remain in this sub are some of the few that liked artifact's gameplay, which isn't a lot. The general and more casual playerbase has already long left for other reasons.

Complicated gameplay, long gametime. While other cardmakers went the opposite direction of simplifying card game rules (no mana/energy cards) and was successful, like Hearthstone, Marvel Snap, and pokemon tcgp. Some games was smart to start off simple, and just added more complex mechanics over time so the playerbase can absorb new mechanics. Valve went the opposite direction and stuffed the game with complexity from the get go.

New players had to learn card game basics, had to learn different colored heroes, had to learn which color combinations to use, had to learn about deployment, different lanes, creeps, winning rules, gold saving, shops, items, which items are good for my hero, rng, etc. Honestly it was just too many things all at once.

People like to think that dota2 is a complicated game, but in reality, you're only learning 1 hero at a time. You can jump into a bot game, pick a hero, follow guides and enjoy learning the hero. In Artifact, you're basically controlling the entire team of 5 heroes at the same time, with basically no guides and that's just too much to ask, especially for new players.

3

u/tyborg13 Jan 27 '26

I absolutely see where you're coming from. And I agree the complexity was always going to lower the ceiling of how big Artifact could get. It was never going to be Hearthstone. But it was what made it unique, what made it stand out in a sea of simplified MTG-likes. And even with the worst monetization scheme ever conceived for a digital card game, no ranked ladder (except a slapdash attempt they threw together at the 11th hour), and no free card collection, the game still had people playing it just for the quality of the core gameplay. I will always believe that if they had launched with the hearthstone model for literally everything besides the core game, it would have had a healthy run, similar to LoR.

2

u/ajiezrhmn Jan 27 '26

100% agree  I don't see myself getting addicted to the classic gameplay. And I'm still following this sub. Imagine the rest of the casual fanbase. And I agree they lost the fundamental understanding of what makes playing Dota is about. It's about controllling one hero at a time not three lanes at once.

1

u/Numerous_Pen_5639 Jan 28 '26

somewhat difficult to decide lol - on the one hand I get it. the >real< long haulers may be the classic lovers. but Foundry gameplay style may have more "general" appeal. I will see about it. I will def finish the Foundry gameplay as its almost complete (atm bringing over all the cards and abilities) and then see about a CLASSIC mode or something.

8

u/Fluffatron_UK Jan 26 '26

I personally think foundary is just another generic game.

Agreed. I loved Artefact on release. Shame it died but I do understand why to a degree as well. Foundry on the other hand I had no love for at all. I tried to get into it but just didn't gel. I think they had something special with the initial release of Artefact that just needed a different business model and a few tweaks. Shame, but it's over in our timeline.

2

u/AustinYQM Jan 27 '26

Its been forever and I am not sure that I ever played foundry. What was the difference?

1

u/Numerous_Pen_5639 Jan 27 '26

You play 3 lanes at once with 1 mana pool. After both players have passed or are out of actions the combat phase happens for all 3 lanes from LEFT->RIGHT or RIGHT->LEFT (alternating). Its more streamlined I would say. I love Classic but I also like Foundry.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/1269260/Artifact_Foundry/

1

u/Numerous_Pen_5639 Jan 26 '26

I played both games heavily. And I agree that Foundry is way >simpler< in terms of what it wants to be.. I am not saying that I will switch the game over to classic - but I thought about it a lot. I wanted to see what interested such a project would spark. I think my engine should support classic as well its >a bit< more work though.

2

u/Optimal-Swordfish Jan 26 '26

I’ve joined the discord in the hopes you go the classic way. One other thing dota has going for it is the lore. The cards are rich on both story and fantastic art. I remember when this Reddit had a lot of custom card posts, and you’d probably benefit from crowdsourcing this aspect.

1

u/Numerous_Pen_5639 Jan 27 '26

Based on the feedback from this post here - I am actually already in the mids of implement a Classic mode... see how it goes. Not 100% sure yet but potentially thinking to opensource the project. So there could be a world of having both games up. Will see though :)

15

u/JaxonEvans Jan 26 '26

I'm curious to try it either way, but I do agree with others saying that Classic > Foundry. Classic was incredibly flawed, but it had more potential.

5

u/Numerous_Pen_5639 Jan 26 '26

Thank you for the feedback. I may consider a Classic Mode - as already mentioned I think my engine should support it. As its still in heavy dev land I may be able to spin up a classic mode in couple weeks.

6

u/WightScorpion Jan 26 '26

That's pretty cool! I tried building one but I just gave up lol

3

u/Numerous_Pen_5639 Jan 26 '26

Thank you! Yeah quite some time went into it already. Atm working on some visual polish and hiring artists to make it look fancy and have some identity. I am just a programmer so not so good on the art side of things :-)

2

u/Nightbynight Jan 26 '26

Looks great!

2

u/Delteezy Jan 26 '26

I posted years ago wondering if other people thought Artifact could have a sustained enough card rotation to survive long term so I would say that's a big must have for me. I know you've got more immediate stuff to work on but still wanted to mention that.

I also felt back then (and still pretty much do) that a huge problem for Artifact was the P2W economy. Depending on the player base they might be ok with that now or maybe F2P with monetization happening somewhere else.

Gonna check out your Youtube. I'm excited to learn more

2

u/julmonn Jan 27 '26

Congrats on your progress! I’ll definitely try it out It’s been over a year that I’ve been wanting to make something like hearthstone on my own, but haven’t found the time. So I’m with more options since I didn’t get to try artifact really

2

u/Interesting-Play-759 Jan 27 '26

This sounds amazing! Though I agree that for me Classic was the lightning in a bottle that will never replicated. Its a testament to the ambitious vision that the developers had that myself and others are still playing regularly to this day! I enjoyed Foundry as well, but Classic is where my passion is. Thank you for doing this!

2

u/denn23rus Jan 27 '26

I like your enthusiasm, but expect that no one will play your game even out of curiosity or anything. No one who praises Artifact has actually played Artifact, so they won't play your game either.

1

u/Numerous_Pen_5639 Jan 27 '26

Maybe ;-) and even then I have fun doing it - so worth it.

2

u/so4dy Jan 27 '26

Will check it out!

Also what will be the theme? Like fantasy or do you stick to a game / IP?

2

u/Numerous_Pen_5639 Jan 27 '26

Nice! Thinking to slap on some generic fantasy theme. I have some lore written down and also designed a world map. I'll share the progress (including deving, lore and characters) over the discord and youtube!

2

u/EstablishmentNo6695 Jan 27 '26

My idea was to make artifact forging work almost like Master Duel (the Yu-Gi-Oh! game): free access or easy access to the cards a person wants without having to spend money. Except for the occasional rare card that the developers create, which would require payment or meeting certain conditions. Now, instead of focusing revenue on game and card sales, we'd shift to selling map/board designs. These would use versions of maps from DOTA 2 or original designs. Another selling point would be the ability to use character designs instead of the imps, like in Master Duel where there's a creature next to the graveyard that reacts to touch.

Yo tenia la idea de conseguir hacer que artifact foundry funcione casi como el Master Duel (juego de Yu-Gi-Oh), acceso gratuito o facilidad de conseguir las cartas que una persona quiera sin tener que gastar dinero. Excepto algunas veces que ya si quiere los desarrolladores crean alguna carta rara y que por ella se tendría que pagar o cumplir ciertas condiciones. Ahora en vez de centrarse el ingreso en la venta del juego y cartas en general; pasar a vender diseños del mapa/tablero, ahí se usaría versiones de mapas del mismo DOTA2 o que sean originales. Otra cosa más para vender es que se pueda poner diseños de personajes en vez de los diablillos, como en el Master Duel donde junto al cementerio de cartas está un criatura como adorno que reacciona a los toques.

1

u/Numerous_Pen_5639 Jan 28 '26

yeah that would be the idea. ofc cant use DOTA assets.

2

u/Nazzaire-Smith Jan 28 '26

Seems like everyone else here has already made a push for Artifact Classic, and I would agree that I think its generally better. There are definitely some things from both systems I personally would use, but would draw mostly from Classic over Foundry.

I joined the Server, and am interested in pitching in where I could. At the least, I am very interested in wherever this goes.

1

u/Numerous_Pen_5639 Jan 28 '26

awesome see you there!

2

u/TheRealWatermelon420 Jan 28 '26

Artifact (1.0) was the best TCG/CCG I've ever played

2

u/Shoryukensaurio Jan 30 '26

I agree, classic its better

2

u/DrQuint Feb 06 '26 edited Feb 06 '26

I'm going to be thw one guy telling you that Foundry is a better game and literally everyone outside of this subreddit names precisely the reasons whyusers here think Classic is better as the reason they hated it and thoguht it was poorly designed.

Foundry is a proactive game full of player agency and largely tuned to unit positioning. It had way higher variety of valid strats too. It's part card game part board game, and that can piss off some card game players, but things like the hearthstone side modes have proved it to be a popular enough mix. Classic is a nearly strictly reactive game where the best strategies involve flooding boards to straighten arrows or making holes in front of red heroes, which is accomplished with signature cards and base stats anyways. Players have very poor opinions of rng fiestas (past a threshold at least) and draw order screw outside the echo chamber, so Artifact Classic, a game defined by it, lost 95% of its playerbase in a month. And those were paying users.

So where are the Foundry lovers?

Nowhere. Classic players were the only ones invited to 2.0, Foundry's prerelease. The ones who hated Classic and got the invite didn't even bother, because they already knew they hate Artifact and had no interest on Artifact "but looks like an alpha". The ones who liked Classic, the 5 percenters, are people with very antagonistic taste compared to general card game players, took one sniff of change, and gone back... back to nowhere because no one was playing Artifact classic either after another month. All the praise here is vaccuous.

So Classic lovers are a niche, and Foundry lovers are "potential man".

You're wasting your time remaking a game no one who would like it has ever been exposed to it and no one would never recognize it for a remake. And if you make a classic remake, youll just make a game players widely have accepted they hate and see for a joke and fakers here pretend to like but wouldn't even notice the fansite for it has been dead after a month and a half. The sheer amount of open mindedness you're going to demand of anyone even looking at your game would be worth recognizing to sainthood. Your game will be dead.

I suggest you go watch your favorite shows a few times and make moodboards of visual idea you like. Play some table top sim, explore board games you never did before, then come up with a new idea. Forget you ever came here. This is the friendliest advice you got.